Bogus Guns In Call of Duty Black Ops

[tacticalcity]

I was expecting to see a lot more ranting and raving about the fact that they included lots of guns that did not exist in the timeline in which the game takes place. The game would have been so much better if the designers did their research and included real vietnam era guns and variants of those guns instead of including weapons invented many, many years later.

[jackandblood]

Reuse existing assets I guess. I mean flamethrower effects implemented in in COD WAW. low and behold, flamethrower as rifle attachment. Everyone stopped taking the franchise seriously after knife throwing and dual wielding. We all know its hollywood

[stormy_clothing]

fictional elements to a fictional story - (insert ironic remarks here)

[Scratch705]

cause it is a video game. sure we can complain but in the end, there is only a small group of people that for one, even notices these inaccuracies, and two, cares enough.

[tacticalcity]

Translation, lazy mo-fos too busy chasing a dollar to do their jobs right.

[UltraLNW]

I would much rather experience a game that puts me in a combat world of fiction and fun, than a game that puts me in a combat world of real danger, exhaustion, boredom, fatigue and frustration.

[pyromensch]

fictional elements to a fictional story - (insert ironic remarks here)

it was fictional?! aww heck, i thought that kennedy, castro, nixon and mcnamara, all fought zombies together. oh well back to the real life game....Pac-man

[Rhythm of Life]

If you want history read the encyclopedia, if you want entertainment play a game.

[tacticalcity]

Translate that to movies. Would you rather watch war movies like GI JOE or BLACKHAWK DOWN? Which is a better movie and why? Research and attention to detail can and do make or break a film or game.

You guys are so completely full of it your eyes are brown. What is worse you know you're full of it. You would never have purchased this game on its own merit. Because it doesn't have any. You did so because of the games that came before it and the games that came before paid at least some attention to detail.

It is a complete and utter cop-out to say "it is just a game" or "it is just a movie". That attitude will result and has resulted in crappy games nobody wants to play and movies nobody wants to see. The only way we get good games and movies is by complaining when they cheat on the research and skimp on the realism. This is a billion dollar business, and if they want to keep making top selling games that set selling records every single time, they are going to have to do more to live upto the Call of Duty name next time around. This one may be a huge seller now, but I would bet good money if they repeat this kind of laziness on the next one it won't be as successful, because a lot of gamers are beyond disapointed in this game. They bought it because the pervious games were so great. Not because of anything this game had to offer on its own. That is going to kill the next games sales unless that game is a marked improvement.

[wksun88]

Translate that to movies. Would you rather watch war movies like GI JOE or BLACKHAWK DOWN? Which is a better movie and why? Research and attention to detail can and do make or break a film or game.

You guys are so completely full of it your eyes are brown. What is worse you know you're full of it. You would never have purchased this game on its own merit. Because it doesn't have any. You did so because of the games that came before it and the games that came before paid at least some attention to detail.

It is a complete and utter cop-out to say "it is just a game" or "it is just a movie". That attitude will result and has resulted in crappy games nobody wants to play and movies nobody wants to see. The only way we get good games and movies is by complaining when they cheat on the research and skimp on the realism. This is a billion dollar business, and if they want to keep making top selling games that set selling records every single time, they are going to have to do more to live upto the Call of Duty name next time around. This one may be a huge seller now, but I would bet good money if they repeat this kind of laziness on the next one it won't be as successful, because a lot of gamers are beyond disapointed in this game. They bought it because the pervious games were so great. Not because of anything this game had to offer on its own. That is going to kill the next games sales unless that game is a marked improvement.

^ agreed, they need to do more testing before they release games as well. Can't believe I paid 60 bucks for this ****

[Nose Nuggets]

Translation, lazy mo-fos too busy chasing a dollar to do their jobs right.

Thats actually not the case usually. A friend of mine works for Activision. They have real ex SF guys helping with the games. They don't do things like dual wielding because they think real people do that in real life, they do it because its cool and its going to sell more copies. If you want an infantry combat simulator, go buy one. Bohimia has been doing really good work with the ArmA series for years now. You have to understand that a HUGE percent of people who play games like Halo and CoD want fun and cool not realistic.

[tacticalcity]

Do a search online my friend. You will discover you are incorrect. A lot of people are annoyed with the lack of attention to detail and reuse of existing assests to save time and money at the expense of realism. Even on their own forum, there are a ton of people complaining about it. The "it is just a game" defense does not cut it when you are spending $60 of your hard earned cash. They have set certain expectations, realisitic guns for the era the game is set in is one of those expectations.

[tacticalcity]

There is no question the game play is fun and the story line is interesting. The one major problem with the game, and thing you see the most amount of complaints about online (other than the use of STEAM) is that they recycled existing assets from other games instead of using real weapons from that era.

I am not exactly asking for money back, but I am not going to buy the next release in the series at full price either, for this level of attention to detail on their part I can afford to wait until the game hits the bargin bin. That buy the way, is a growing sentiment being echoed again and again online. They lost a huge segment of their fan base who before would have paid any dollar amount for their games, and now will wait however long it takes for it to go on sale. The "I've gotta have this right now" edge that they had before this game is gone.

The real guns from that era would have been a lot of fun. Slick side XM117s (what the USAF calls GAU-5s) for one would have made an excellent primary weapon for the main character. Actual scopes from that area instead of "ACOGS" would have been great. Vietnam Era M40 and M40A1 sniper rifles with the correct optics would have been great. Stuff history buffs and gun nuts would have raved about. Instead, they instantly alienated about 1/3 of the audience they have locked into instantly buying a copy of their next release. Some of those guys will still buy the next version no matter what. But a lot won't...and that translates into huge numbers. Worse, you are starting to hear non-gun guys echo this complaint, and before they heard us complain they would never have even noticed. They may not know realism if it hit them in the head, but they still want it in their games.

Reputation is everything. Part of Call of Duty's superior reputation had to do with the fact that you were using the real weapons of the era, or at least as close as any video game ever got, and you were using a boat load of them. Now that no longer applies. Which in the long run will hurt sales.

[gadjeep]

Just another reason i didn't buy this one or WAW. This developer stinks.

[FNH5-7]

OP,

did the Stoners reflex really exist?